<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Memo Claims Authority to Kill al Qaeda Members</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dailypolitical.com/issues/memo-claims-authority-to-kill-al-qaeda-members.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dailypolitical.com/issues/memo-claims-authority-to-kill-al-qaeda-members.htm</link>
	<description>Daily Politics and U.S. News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2013 14:08:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Curly</title>
		<link>http://www.dailypolitical.com/issues/memo-claims-authority-to-kill-al-qaeda-members.htm#comment-60660</link>
		<dc:creator>Curly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailypolitical.com/?p=66644#comment-60660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let us roll back time to 2008 where candidate Obama and the left end of the democratic party were criticizing W Bush for his drown stricks. Then the drone strikes were only against foreign terrorist but now Obama has taken everything Bush did and pushed much further than Bush could have dreamed except water boarding which was not lethal.  I guess that Obama thinks it is better to kill than to use a nonlethal method to obtain information. This decision is bad enough when it was restricted to non citizens but to violate the US constitution on top of that? If they are going to kill citizens then why don&#039;t they do it legally by trying the victim (ah, I mean subject) to a trial in his absents. 
But now let us take this a little further. Say that person who is defined as an enemy planning to kill in the US and is a US citizen in the US the government could order that person to be killed (under the pretense of arrest. The person would not be given the chance to surrender and there would be no one to say that his civil rights were violated. This could also be taken further so that it would apply to political enemies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let us roll back time to 2008 where candidate Obama and the left end of the democratic party were criticizing W Bush for his drown stricks. Then the drone strikes were only against foreign terrorist but now Obama has taken everything Bush did and pushed much further than Bush could have dreamed except water boarding which was not lethal.  I guess that Obama thinks it is better to kill than to use a nonlethal method to obtain information. This decision is bad enough when it was restricted to non citizens but to violate the US constitution on top of that? If they are going to kill citizens then why don&#8217;t they do it legally by trying the victim (ah, I mean subject) to a trial in his absents.<br />
But now let us take this a little further. Say that person who is defined as an enemy planning to kill in the US and is a US citizen in the US the government could order that person to be killed (under the pretense of arrest. The person would not be given the chance to surrender and there would be no one to say that his civil rights were violated. This could also be taken further so that it would apply to political enemies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
